Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?

Think long and hard, your answer could have more serious implications than you think.
_____________________________________________________________

One of the greatest attacks of Christianity is the attack of what non-Christians call "the creation myth."

Now, the Bible begins (as makes chronological sense) an account of the formation of not only the earth and everything on it, but also the universe.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." - Genesis 1:1

There exists a similar idea in most religions, that a god or gods were involved somehow in the creation of the earth or at least the life on it. Click here to see a brief outline of the Christian/Jewish, Islamic, Hindu or Mayan understandings of creation.

The main theory in opposition to an Intelligent Design Theory or Creationist Theory is that of Evolution, or more specifically neo-Darwinism.

Charles Darwin is often heralded as the founder of evolutionary theory. What Darwin did however was to supply a mechanism (natural selection) for evolution. Evolution is essentially a cry for an answer to the origins of life apart from any divine interference. As most historians agree, Darwin’s main aim was to explain the world without God. Thus Evolution is essentially an atheistic world view.

Richard Dawkins, an Oxford University Professor, wrote "Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Charles Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."

There are two types of evolution, Microevolution and Macroevolution. Microevolution ,or natural selection, is the understanding that some animal life has evolved in some regards within its own "kind", yet it does not allow that one "kind" may evolve into another "kind". This is consistant with the Biblical view. For example all races came from two parents, Adam and Eve (or later Noah and his Wife). With the passage of time the small differences in the appearance of people were amplified as the groups split up and were segregated by their locality as people migrated around the world. Microevolution is used erronously as proof for Macroevolution. Macroevolution contending that biological population changes take place (typically via mutations and natural selection) on a large enough scale to produce entirely new structural features and organs, resulting in lower life kinds giving rise to higher kinds, such that mammals evolved from microscopic sea creatures, birds evolved from land animals, and humans and apes have a common ancestor.

Microevolution is an understanding that all species of dogs for example, are descendant from the one 'dog' creature. Macroevolution, on the other hand, is more of a goo-plus-time-equals-you proposition.

I do not have space here to adaquately address the scientific evidence for or against neo-Darwinian Evolution but if you are interested visit either Creation on the Web or Answers in Genesis for an abundance of information.

One point I will raise though is that if neo-Darwinism were an accurate theory there should be a strong fossil record to support it. That is there should be many fossils of transitional (mid evolution) creatures. However, when asked why he did not include any images of such fossils in his book titled Evolution, Dr. Colin Patterson (former senior paleontoligist at the British Museum of Natural History) answered "...I will lay it on the line - there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight arguement."

One would think that the atheistic bias behind evolutionary thinking would alert Christians of the need to oppose it. However, the main reason it is so dangerous to Christianity is that, large sections of the Church have tried to reconcile Christianity and neo-Darwinist Evolution.

Since Evolution and scriptural Creationism are such opposing views, in order to be reconciled to each other, one must be altered or modified somewhat. It is always Scripture that is ‘re-interpreted’ to fit in with man’s wisdom. But God’s word never changes, while it is hard to find a five-year-old science textbook that is not outdated!

The 3 main ways that Evolution is reconciled to the Bible is through what is called Gap theory, Progressive Creation or that Genesis is only allegorical.

Gap Theory - A hypothesis that there is a chronological gap between Genesis 1:2 and 1:3 during which geological and biological evolution occurred.

Progressive Creation - A hypothesis that the 'days' of Creation in Genesis are not literal days but are ages and stages of evolution including a period in which a race of souless 'men' lived.

Genesis is only allegorical - A hypothesis that Genesis was never intended to be literally interpreted and is simply a Christian 'fairy tale'.

The problem with these theories is not only that they contradict and add to Genesis, but they also seriously contradict the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Gap Theory and Progressive Creation are dangerous because they add to scripture. In order to insert the billions of years needed for neo-Darwinian evolution to occur there must have been billions of years filled with pain, suffering, disease, and death and species gradually evolved and became extinct until we arrive at the animals, plants and humans of today. If the Gospel is true then this simply cannot be the case.

1. "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day." Genesis 1:31. Would a perfect God have said "the last billions of years filled with pain, death, suffering, struggle and extinction have been very good."
   


2. "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23. If death came before sin, then mankind cannot be given eternal life through salvation from sin.



3. "He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets." Acts 3:21. Only an original creation free from death makes God’s promise of restoration logical. A perfect creation cannot be restored in the future if no perfect creation existed in the past.

An understanding of Genesis that considers it allegorical essentially says that Jesus was not a savior, but a loon. As Richard Dawkins said in an interview "Oh but of course the story of Adam and Eve was only ever symbolic, wasn’t it? Symbolic?! Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin by a non-existent individual. Nobody not brought up in the faith could reach any verdict other than barking mad!" the whole premis of Christianity is that Jesus actually died to atone for sin. The sin which has been cursing the earth since, but was introduced into the world through an actual man, Adam.

Richard Dawkins also said "It seems to me an odd proposition that we should adhere to some parts of the Bible story but not to others. After all, when it comes to important moral questions, by what standards do we cherry-pick the Bible? Why bother with the Bible at all if we have the ability to pick and choose from it, what is right and what is wrong?" Even a staunch atheist can plainly see that modifying Genesis to allow for neo-Darwinian Evolution is paramount to denying the validity of the entire Bible.

Why do some Christians try to manipulate the scripture to make room for an atheistic world view?

So, which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?

The Evolutionist must answer "The Egg of course. At some stage there must have been a creature which was not a chicken, who layed an egg containing a chicken."

The Christian must answer "The Chicken of course. Genesis chapter 1 clearly tells us that God created the Heavens and the Earth and everything within them in six days. He created all things, and His creation was good."